He became world famous as a star of genre classic Jurassic Park (1993)† where the dino icon easily knocks over cars and bites people off toilet bowls. But also for that Tyrannosaurus Rex already one of the most imaginative dinosaurs, probably the most visible of all its dinosaur companions on the silver screen, be it fighting an absurdly large ape in King Kong (1933) or as a toy variant in Toy Story (1995).
And yes: although one screen variant differs more from the real animal than the other, they are all based on the primal animal that stomped around the plains of present-day North America 68 to 66 million years ago. You can even see the remains of those animals in museums such as the Leiden Naturalis, where T. rex Trix with her skull close to the ground looks the visitors in the eye.
But, a research group writes this week after a systematic analysis of hip bones and teeth from 38 fossils in the trade magazine Evolutionary Biology† maybe ‘T. rexreality three different kinds.
Anyone wishing to scientifically reclassify such an iconic dinosaur must of course ensure that the fresh variants have just as evocative names as the original. Next Tyrannosaurus Rex (loosely translated: tyrannical lizard king), the researchers therefore introduce Tyrannosaurus Imperator (tyrannical lizard emperor) and Tyrannosaurus regina (tyrannical lizard queen).
According to them, the emperor lived the longest ago, and had four small incisors in the lower jaw and relatively sturdy thighs. That species then evolved into two younger species — the king and queen — that had only two incisors. One of those two species has much slimmer thighs and a somewhat lighter build: the queen. The one who remained more like their ancestor in terms of sturdiness, continues to use the name rex.
From a marketing point of view, their proposal is therefore well boarded up, but other paleontologists think that the researchers are going very fast. ‘I understand the temptation to T. rex into different types, because there is indeed some variation in the bones that we know. But in the end, as far as I’m concerned, that variation is very small. Until I see stronger evidence, this will just stay with me T. rex‘, says paleontologist Stephen Brusatte (University of Edinburgh) this week, for example in the British weekly New Scientist† And Thomas Carr (Carthage College) also thinks the researchers are wrong. “I think they just see what they want to see,” he says in the same magazine.
Even co-author Scott Persons gives opposite magazine National Geographic allow him and his colleagues to sit next to it. ‘I wouldn’t be surprised if it turns out that the new species definitions are not quite right’, he says, among other things. “But what I’m sure of is that there was more than one species of Tyrannosaurus.”
Until it is clear who is right, film makers do not have to wonder which member of the noble family of tyrannical lizards they will give the leading role.